Winnipeg councillors opt for higher firefighting fees for owners of vacant buildings than recommended by staff | CBC News

Winnipeg city councillors approved a proposal to lower fees charged to owners of vacant buildings for fire responses at their properties, but the fees they voted for are still higher than city staff had recommended.

Last year, the city started billing owners for sending firefighters to empty buildings where blazes break out, with the average bill being $26,000. 

Maria Suzuki was one of the owners charged. She owns a number of properties in Winnipeg, including what’s now an empty lot on Elgin Avenue. After five fires at the house that previously stood there, the city demolished it and handed Suzuki a bill for $138,000, the highest fee among the 43 properties cited. 

“I did everything I can. I boarded up, I did renovate the property. I tried to do everything and then still got some unwanted people, or person, set the fire on my property,” Suzuki said in an interview Wednesday.

According to a recent city report, the city issued nearly $1.2 million in fees last year, but collected less than $79,000. Dealing with disputes over the fees was resource-intensive for the city, the report says, but the fees don’t appear to reduced the number of fires.

In some cases, the fees may have discouraged owners from making repairs, possibly leading to more fires, the report said.

Suzuki says she paid $36,000 of her fees — nearly half of the total the city collected last year.

“I don’t think it’s fair to be getting charged so much off the fire fees,” she said.

In response to concerns from property owners like Suzuki, city staff recommended bringing in a new set of lower fees, which they hoped would lead to more owners paying up.

On Wednesday, however, council’s executive policy committee voted in favour of higher fees than recommended, in some cases more than doubling the recommended amount.

A report from the Winnipeg Fire Paramedic Service recommended charging owners $5,000 for the first fire at a property and up to $20,000 for the fourth or subsequent fire.

The executive policy committee voted to raise those fees to $10,000 for the first fire, up to a maximum fine of $50,000.

Punishing owners twice: lawyer

Although the new proposed fees are lower than what she was charged last year, Suzuki says the practice of billing owners who are often the victims of arson is unfair.

“We could use that money to renovate the property,” she said. 

Lawyer John Prystanski, a former city councillor who is representing four property owners, including Suzuki, says the penalties revictimize owners.

“Why are they punishing them twice? What they should be doing is focusing on the long-term vacant buildings that the city knows there’s no motivation to renovate,” Prystanski told reporters.

He said he would like the city to refund fees if owners fix up their properties within a certain time period.

Coun. Evan Duncan (Charleswood-Tuxedo-Westwood), who brought forward the amending motion to increase the new set of fees, says the city needs to crack down on those who are not taking care of their properties.

“There are cases where people have these properties sitting for extended periods of time, and … they know that in some of these communities there are problems with fires,” he told reporters.

“They should be more proactive to making sure that we don’t have properties that are targeted.”

The committee passed Duncan’s motion unanimously with no discussion.

Mayor Scott Gillingham said the city needs to maintain a balance of incentives and penalties.

“There are many property owners who are sitting on their properties, not developing them,” he told reporters. “We have 700 vacant and derelict properties in the city of Winnipeg. We need those properties turned into residential development.”

The proposed fee changes have not yet been approved by full council.